Suppr超能文献

激光神经修复与显微缝合对接相比如何?

Is laser nerve repair comparable to microsuture coaptation?

作者信息

Maragh H, Hawn R S, Gould J D, Terzis J K

机构信息

Microsurgical Research Center, Medical College of Hampton Roads, Norfolk, Virginia.

出版信息

J Reconstr Microsurg. 1988 Apr;4(3):189-95. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-1006919.

Abstract

Efforts to improve functional recovery following nerve injury and repair have included studies of sutureless repairs. The rat sciatic nerve was used as an experimental model to compare the efficacy of laser nerve repairs with standard microsuture repairs. Electrophysiologic (Compound Action Potential), quantitative morphometric, and behavioral (toe spread) measurements were used for assessment, and tensile strength of the repairs was also determined. Electrophysiologic studies showed that microsuture-repaired nerves had significantly faster conduction velocities, but the areas of the waveforms and peak amplitudes showed no significant differences between the two repair groups. Axon counts revealed significant differences in the suture group proximal to the repair site, contrasted with laser repairs. Toe spread evaluations, carried out at three day intervals, demonstrated a significant difference between the two methods of repair in only three out of 22 test dates: in these isolated cases, the suture group measurements were superior. The tensile strength findings confirmed that, at four days, microsuture repair was significantly stronger but thereafter, there was no difference between the two nerve repair techniques.

摘要

为改善神经损伤和修复后的功能恢复所做的努力包括对无缝合修复的研究。大鼠坐骨神经被用作实验模型,以比较激光神经修复与标准显微缝合修复的效果。采用电生理(复合动作电位)、定量形态学和行为学(趾展)测量进行评估,并测定修复的拉伸强度。电生理研究表明,显微缝合修复的神经传导速度明显更快,但两个修复组之间波形面积和峰值幅度无显著差异。轴突计数显示,与激光修复相比,缝合组在修复部位近端存在显著差异。每隔三天进行一次趾展评估,结果显示在22个测试日期中,只有3个日期两种修复方法存在显著差异:在这些个别情况下,缝合组的测量结果更优。拉伸强度研究结果证实,在四天时,显微缝合修复明显更强,但此后,两种神经修复技术之间没有差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验